Impact of Virtual Advertising in Sports Events

Matthias Sander* and Claudia Fantapié Altobelli**

* Matthias Sander is Professor of Marketing at the University of Konstanz, Box 130,

78457 Konstanz, GERMANY (Phone: +49-7531-88-2599, Fax: +49-7531-88-3560,
Email: Matthias.Sander@uni-konstanz.de)

** Claudia Fantapié Altobelli is Professor of Marketing at the Helmut Schmidt Universi-

ty, University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, Holstenhofweg 85, 22043 Ham-
burg, GERMANY (Phone: +49-40-6541-2772, Fax: +49-40-6541-2090, Email: fanta-
pie@hsu-hh.de)

1
 Impact of Virtual Advertising in Sports Events

Summary
Virtual advertising is a technology that allows digitised superimposition of images (i.e.
advertising signage) into a television broadcast. The paper examines the effects of virtual ad-
vertising in a sports broadcast setting. We analyse the effects of conspicuousness of virtual
advertising and match the results with a media analysis of the sports event. For this purpose,
we developed a multiple regression analysis model, with the recall of the advertised brands as
a dependent variable. Furthermore, we measure the role of attitude towards advertising in
general and its impact on attitude towards virtual advertising and on the recall performance of
the respondents.
Our results indicate that virtual advertising is highly recognized by the participants. Ad-
vertising effectiveness is extremely driven by the frequency of exposure. A positive attitude
towards advertising in general leads to a positive attitude towards virtual advertising but has
no effect upon the recall performance of the participants.

Keywords: virtual advertising, sponsoring, virtual signage, billboard advertising

2
 Impact of Virtual Advertising in Sports Events

INTRODUCTION
The diminishing effectiveness of conventional forms of advertising due to an increas-
ing reactance of recipients induces advertisers to turn towards more innovative forms of ad-
vertising. These include, among others, split screens, preminders, crawls, end splits, program
sponsoring etc. used in the TV sector, or pop-up inserts, China-covers, ads in the center, ad-
vertising post-its etc. in the print sector (Fösken 2005). The main purpose of these special
forms of advertising is to prevent intentional zapping by viewers, at the same time enhancing
the effectiveness of advertising due to their unique feature. These new forms of advertising
also include virtual advertising.
Virtual advertising can be defined as the insertion of brands, products, trade marks, lo-
gos, slogans and 3D animations by means of digital, computer-supported TV-signal process-
ing (Cianfrone et al. 2006). In recent years, virtual advertising has frequently been used dur-
ing sports events (e.g. soccer, baseball, basketball) mostly in the U.S. In Europe, especially
due to legal insecurity, virtual advertising has not been used very often so far. This form of
advertising is only visible to the television viewer. People in the stadium cannot see the im-
posed sign.
One may distinguish various types of virtual advertising. Virtual advertising may be
integrated into live programs or into TV recordings. It may have a static aspect or appear as a
dynamic picture (e.g. billboard advertising). Virtual advertising may be employed to substi-
tute the existing advertising by cross-fading or it may appear as additional advertising on
spaces previously not used for advertising. Furthermore, virtual advertising may be shown in
a fixed, determined place, but the near future will also facilitate presentation on moving ob-
jects (e.g. sports shirts) (Virtualvas 2007). Regarding its possible fields of application, one
may differentiate between virtual billboard advertising, virtual field paints, virtual advertising
on other surfaces, floating balls, game enhancements, and virtual placements.
A significant advantage of virtual advertising is the target group-specific use facili-
tated by this type of advertising. For example, during international sports events advertise-
ments can be delivered in country-specific broadcasts. Thus, advertisements can be tailored
not only according to regional consumers’ buying habits and brand preferences, but also to
country-specific advertising regulations, e.g. for alcoholic beverages or tobacco products.
Additionally, it facilitates a prompt and cost-efficient updating of advertising messages (Eck-
stein 1999). The time- and cost-intensive production of panels etc. for board advertising be-

3
comes unnecessary. Regardless of legal restrictions, virtual advertising helps to create addi-
tional advertising space such as on the playing field (field paints), in the air (floating balls), or
on other advertising areas not used so far (for example in form of boards on the right- and
left-hand side of the goal in soccer). Thus, it helps to expand the advertising facilities and
allows highly attractive and eye-catching placements. Also, it allows a multiple sale of one
and the same advertising space, which expands the revenue facilities of organizers, sports
clubs and broadcasters, thus permitting a better refinancing of major sports events.
Little has been known so far about the effects of this innovative form of advertising on
potential customers. Our study has therefore been conceived as an exploratory study to deliver
first insights into the effectiveness of virtual advertising in sports events. Furthermore, we
will show future areas of research in this field.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Academic research on sports advertising and sponsorships has a long tradition. Much
of the debate has focused on sponsoring effectiveness, especially concerning brand recall and
brand attitude (Harshaw & Turner 1999; Bennet 1999; Turley & Shannon 2000; Pham & Jo-
har 2001; Grohs et al. 2004; Rifon at al. 2004; Wakefield et al. 2007). Among others, the fol-
lowing key factors affect sponsorship recall: affinity between sponsor and sponsored activity,
sponsorship integration, sponsor prominence / prior brand awareness, conditions of exposure
(frequency and / or duration), sports involvement, product / brand involvement.
Far less studies focus on image effects of sponsorship, especially image transfer
(Meenaghan & Shipley 1999; Gierl & Kirchner 1999). Other studies deal with managerial
aspects of sponsorships such as sponsorship selection, organisation and control (Farrelly et al.
1997; Quester et al. 1998; Drees 1991). Less attention has been paid so far to the financial
value of sponsorships (Olson & Thjømøe 2009).
Although there is a large body of literature examining various practical and theoretical
aspects of sponsorship (see the overview in Walliser 2003 and, for more recent studies, Wake-
field et al. 2007), so far there have been only few studies dealing with the effects of virtual
advertising. A study conducted by RSL Sponsorship, Sport und Leisure in 1997 to assess the
acceptance and effectiveness of virtual advertising during the ATP Tennis Tour (Sasse &
Ludwig 2002) showed a generally positive attitude towards virtual advertising, with a higher
recognition level for logos inserted on the playing area than for those inserted on the sides of
the court. Generally, virtual advertising was perceived as not disturbing; moreover, almost
half of the respondents showed a positive attitude towards the firms using virtual advertising

4
and a high degree of purchase intention. A study by FORSA on virtual advertising during
soccer matches (FORSA 1998) also showed a generally positive attitude towards virtual ad-
vertising. However, elderly people felt more disturbed (41% of those aged 50 to 59) than the
under-thirties, who hardly had any objections against virtual advertising. Also, respondents
with a higher degree of soccer involvement felt insertions on the playing area as distracting.
As for the effectiveness of virtual advertising, virtual billboard advertising achieved higher
recall rates than conventional billboard advertising, especially among younger TV viewers.
The results were confirmed by Pyun et al. (2004), with a recognition level for virtually adver-
tised brands nearly doubling that of conventionally advertised brands. However, a focus group
study commissioned by GLOBAL SPORTNET pointed out that virtual advertising should be
carried out in a not too obtrusive way and should not divert from the sports event. As for the
forms of virtual advertising, virtual advertising on the field, insertions next to the goal and
virtual 3D animations were rather rejected (Sasse & Ludwig 2002).
In a day-after recall test for a representative household sample, Psyma Psychological
Market Analysis analysed the effectiveness of virtual advertising in the match Benfica Lisbon
versus FC Bavaria Munich (Psyma 1999). As a result, virtual billboard advertising achieved
higher rates of attention than conventional billboard advertising. Younger TV viewers showed
higher attention values with regard to virtual advertising than older viewers. Furthermore, the
acceptance of virtual advertising among the respondents was very high.
A study conducted by Gallup Mexico for Publicidad Virtual showed that virtual adver-
tising was seen as modern, creative and innovative and would generate a higher perception of
brands than all other programme-integrated forms of advertising (Doyle 2000). The central
finding of the study was that 60% of the respondents preferred virtual advertising to all other
forms of advertising. Cianfrone et al. (2006) compared the effectiveness of virtual advertising
to conventional television commercials during a sports broadcast. Different forms of virtual
advertising were used, like virtual advertising on the field, virtual insertion of brands into the
score display, virtual insertions on the side boundary lines, virtual advertising on or close to
the goal posts and virtual billboard advertising. The match was interrupted by a commercial
break with several 30-second commercial spots. The study showed that virtual advertising,
compared to commercials, came off well in terms of recall levels. The purpose of the study by
Bennett et al. (2006) was to analyse the perceptual antecedents of attitude towards advertising
in general via television commercials and towards virtual advertising to compare the two me-
dia vehicles in a sports broadcast setting. The findings indicate that individual responses to
advertising vary according to the type of advertising. Television commercials were perceived

5
as being more entertaining and informative, but on the other hand more irritating and less
credible than virtual advertisements. Location of virtual ads plays also an important role.
Summing up the results of the studies on effectiveness we can state that, in cognitive
respects, virtual advertising can reach considerable effects with potential customers. However,
a clear-cut statement as to which style of virtual advertising may have the highest promotional
effectiveness is not possible; in addition to positioning, the concrete design of virtual advertis-
ing plays an essential role here. Furthermore, on the basis of the results from the study by
Cianfrone et al. (2006), it may be assumed that a particularly high advertising effectiveness is
obtained by combining the classic forms of advertising (TV spots advertisements or program
sponsoring) with virtual advertising for brand commercials. In an affective respect, it is no-
ticeable that in almost all studies, virtual advertising was perceived as positive by potential
customers. However, a not too obtrusive implementation is regarded as essential; a presenta-
tion that is too obtrusive, diverting from the actual sports events, is not accepted. In this case
there is an increased danger of TV viewers moving off to other channels – including pay-TV.

HYPOTHESES
None of the studies mentioned above analyses whether customers can recognize vir-
tual advertising in the sense that they can differentiate between virtual advertisements and
conventional advertisements explicitly. Given the novelty of this instrument, we expect that
virtual advertising attracts a great deal of attention and, at the same time, stands out from con-
ventional forms of advertising (Pyun & Kim 2004; Cianfrone et al. 2006). Hence, the first
hypothesis is:
H1: Virtual advertising as an innovative form of advertising is recognized as such
by the majority of viewers.
As earlier studies in the field of traditional sports advertising have shown, the effec-
tiveness of advertising depends on a multitude of variables (Harshaw & Turner 1999; Olivier
& Kraak 1997; Moore et al. 1999; Turley & Shannon 2000; Grohs et al. 2004). We expect
that exposure time, exposure frequency and prior brand awareness will determine the recall of
these brands. As shown in studies on conventional advertising (e.g. Sander 2004; Sandler &
Shani 1989; Walliser 1997; Hackforth 1989) it has to be expected that these variables will
have a positive impact on recall and recognition rates. Therefore, our second hypothesis is:
H2: Exposure time, exposure frequency and brand awareness determine the degree
of recall of the brands advertised.

6
 Furthermore, the attitude of recipients towards virtual advertising is of relevance. It is
particularly interesting to find out whether people with a positive (negative) attitude towards
conventional advertising have a positive (negative) attitude towards virtual advertising as well
(Wang et al. 2002; Petrovici & Marinov 2007). Hence, our third hypothesis is:
H3: Respondents with a positive (negative) attitude towards advertising in general
have a positive (negative) attitude towards virtual advertising as well.
The attitude towards advertising may also be assumed as a determining factor of the
effectiveness of advertising (Mehta 2000; Lutz et al. 1983; James & Kover 1992). This ap-
plies both to conventional and to virtual advertising. As a fourth hypothesis, we may therefore
state:
H4a: A positive (negative) attitude towards advertising in general has a positive
(negative) effect on the recall performance of respondents.
H4b: A positive (negative) attitude towards virtual advertising has a positive (nega-
tive) effect on the recall performance of respondents.

DATA AND METHOD

In the present study, students of a German university were interviewed about the effec-
tiveness of virtual advertising. The interview was based on a non-random sample of partici-
pants, as customary for exploratory studies (e.g. Cianfrone et al. 2006; Brand & Greenburg
1994). For this purpose, an 18-minute film clip of the soccer match Hertha BSC Berlin versus
VfB Stuttgart was chosen, showing both conventional advertising (in form of perimeter ad-
vertising billboards and sports shirt advertising) and virtual advertising in form of virtual bill-
boards on the right- and left-hand off-goal sides. The students were shown the match clip,
followed by a written standardized interview. A total of 142 students participated in the study
whose questionnaires could all be evaluated. The enquiry recorded the participants’ gender
and their general interest in soccer match broadcasts as a measure of sports involvement.
Gender-related differences in the perception of (conventional) advertising have already been
found in other studies regarding the effectiveness of advertising (e. g. Brunel & Nelson 2003;
Sander 2004); a test set-up including this feature therefore seemed reasonable. Consideration
of sports involvement is based on the hypothesis that a pronounced interest in this direction
may influence the effectiveness of advertising (Walliser 1997, Meenaghan 2001). Other au-
thors, however, found no significant impact of sports involvement on advertising effective-
ness (Turley & Shannon 2000). Because of a low variance in age this variable was not in-
cluded in the analyses explicitly. The structure of the sample is shown in Table 1.

7
 Sample total n = 142
Gender male female
90.8 % 9.2 %
Sports involvementa high medium low
34.5 % 23.9 % 40.1 %
a = not specified: 1.5%
Table 1: Structure of the sample

Additionally, the questionnaire comprised questions about attitudes towards advertis-

ing in general and towards virtual advertising in particular using some perceptual antecedents
of the Brackett and Carr´s (2001) model. Like Cianfrone et al. (2006), the focus was, how-
ever, on virtual advertising as compared to conventional advertising. We measured this
through the respondents’ recall of the respective advertisement (Wells 2000), whereby un-
aided recall was recorded for one half of the respondents (n=71) and aided recall was re-
corded for the other half (n=71). Furthermore, in a preliminary study we assessed respon-
dents’ prior brand awareness, given that different levels of brand awareness may influence the
effectiveness of the advertising for these brands. This effect could be measured in other sports
event studies with conventional advertisements (Walliser 1997; Sander 2004).
A total of five brands/firms were advertised during the soccer match. Advertising was
delivered as advertising on the shirts of players (Arcor and EnBW), the referee and his assis-
tants (Dekra), and also as billboard advertising (Premiere and betandwin.de). Billboard adver-
tising for both brands was made on physical billboards (alongside the pitch) and virtually (on
the right- and left-hand off-goal sides).
In addition to questioning, we performed a media analysis of the soccer match clip, in-
cluding the duration and the frequency of insertion of the individual brands. The duration of
exposure is considered as a typical determinant of the recall performance for sports advertis-
ing (Pieters & Bijmolt 1997; Nebenzahl & Hornik 1985). Durations of less than a second
were not considered within this survey, for it is assumed here that they have no effectiveness
at all. This is common practice in this kind of research and is in accordance with the findings
of the psychology of perception (Taub & Abrams 1971). We included the frequency of expo-
sure given that effectiveness might vary depending on whether a brand is shown more rarely
but longer, or more frequently but for a shorter duration (Longmann 1997; Tellis 1997; Turley
and Shannon 2000). We did not include the design of the billboards in the test as none of the
billboards used were particularly eye-catching; thus, we could not take into consideration this
effect.
8
 ANALYSES AND RESULTS
The fact that virtual advertising had been used in the soccer match was recognized by
a total of 77.5% of the participants. 92.7% of these did assign virtual advertising correctly, i.e.
they recognized it as off-goal billboard. Therefore, H1 is supported. Further analysis showed
that there is no significant impact of gender and sports involvement on the perception of vir-
tual advertising.

Aided recall level Unaided recall

level
betandwin.de 82,1 % 82,9 %
Actual billboard advertising along the pitch
betandwin.de 71,6 % 52,9 %
Off-goal billboard advertising (virtual advertising)
Premiere 41,8 % 37,1 %
Actual billboard advertising along the pitch
Premiere 64,2 % 58,6 %
Off-goal billboard advertising (virtual advertising)
Dekra 44,8 % 42,9 %
Sports shirt advertising
EnBW 74,6 % 74,3 %
Sports shirt advertising
Arcor 82,1 % 78,6 %
Sports shirt advertising
Table 2: Recall performance of different types of advertising

A detailed insight into the effectiveness of different kinds of advertisements can be ob-
tained by regarding the recall levels of these advertisements for the individual brands. Table 2
displays the aided and unaided recall rates for the individual brands in dependence of the kind
of advertising for these brands. The participants could choose here between “sports shirt ad-
vertising”, “billboard advertising along the pitch”, “off-goal billboard advertising” and
“other”, multiple selections being possible (and correct in the case of Premiere and betand-
win.de). Overall, the recall levels are very high, with rather small differences in aided and
unaided recall in many cases. This result may be explained by the fact that there were only
five brands advertised, but also that the questionnaire was administered directly after showing
the match.
Nevertheless, as shown in Table 2, the recall values of the individual brands vary to a
great extent. For example, the brand “Dekra” was recalled by nearly half as many respon-
dents as the brand “Arcor”. For explaining such effects, we performed an OLS regression

9
with the recall of the advertised brands as a dependent variable. The following results refer to
the aided recall1. We included the following independent (explanatory) variables:
• the duration of exposure to individual brands, differentiated according to the modality
of advertising,
• the frequency of exposure to individual brands, differentiated according to the modal-
ity of advertising, and
• prior brand awareness.

Frequency of Duration of expo- Brand aware-

exposure sure (in sec.) ness level
betandwin.de 42 557 93.5 %
Actual billboard advertising
along the pitch
betandwin.de 21 83
Off-goal billboard advertising
(virtual advertising)
Premiere --- --- 99,0 %
Actual billboard advertising
along the pitcha
Premiere 15 71
Off-goal billboard advertising
(virtual advertising)
Dekra 4 23 99,0 %
Sports shirt advertising
EnBW 12 38 58.5 %
Sports shirt advertising
Arcor 20 79 99,0 %
Sports shirt advertising
a
Variable excluded due to poor legibility or duration of exposure < 1 s
Table 3: Frequency of exposure, duration of exposure and awareness of the advertised brands

Table 3 shows the observations for these variables. Billboard advertising along the
pitch for the brand “Premiere” was no longer taken into account here, as the billboard was
either hardly legible or the duration of exposure was under the assumed limit of one second.
Our model gives an excellent explanation for the effect of the variables affecting the
respondents’ recall performance. An r2 of 0.942 (r2adj=0.884) indicates a very good model fit.
The whole model is highly significant (p=0.023). The autocorrelation test of the independent
variables showed negligible correlation. The frequency of exposure appears here as an out-

1
Calculations with the unaided recall produced comparable results.

10
standing explanatory variable (p=0.014). This result was also obtained in other studies (Grohs
et al. 2004; Tellis 1997; Sander 2004). The importance of this variable, compared to the other
independent variables, becomes evident in terms of the beta value, which is clearly higher
than with the other variables (the sign is of no relevance here). Of lesser significance is the
duration of exposure (p=0.06). Furthermore, the sign is wrong. At first this might be surpris-
ing, but it is consistent with the results from other studies (Sander 2004). Obviously, it is the
frequency and not the duration of exposure that is essential for the recall performance. This
indicates that recipients do perceive the advertised brand during a longer exposure, but after
perceiving the brand their attention shifts immediately back to the sports event. Prior brand
awareness as an explanatory variable proved to be non-significant (p=0.149). However, the
small variance of these variables might be essential here, as nearly all brands showed very
high awareness rates of the respondents (see Table 3). Therefore, H2 is confirmed with regard
to the frequency of exposure and rejected with regard to brand awareness and the duration of
exposure. The results of the OLS regression are summarized in Table 4.

r2 =0.942 (r2adj =0.884)

F-value = 16.179
Significance = 0.023
Explained Variable Explanatory Variable Beta-Value Significance
Brand awareness level - 0.272 0.149
Aided recall
Frequency of exposure 1.686 0.014*
Duration of exposure - 0.963 0.06
* = highly significant
Table 4: Results of the multiple regression analysis

In order to gain further information about the cognitive structures of the participants
and also possible further explanatory variables for the effectiveness of conventional and vir-
tual advertising, we asked the participants to assess their attitude towards advertising in gen-
eral as well as towards virtual advertising. For this purpose, we used 5-point multi-attribute
Likert scales (Churchill 1979; Converse & Presser 1986) including items with a positive
phrasing (e.g. “Advertising offers interesting information about products and brands”) as well
as reversed items (“I find advertising disturbing”). Possible answers were offered by a scale
of one to five, the end points being “I totally agree” (=1) and “I do not agree at all” (=5). The
participants’ attitude towards advertising in general is summarized in Table 5.

11
 I rather agree I rather disagree
Item
(1+2) (3+4+5)
I find advertising disturbing 50.7 % 49.3 %
Advertising offers interesting
information about products 17.6 % 81.7 %
and brandsa
Advertising creates new jobs 70.9 % 29.1 %
Advertising is entertaining 20.4 % 79.6 %
a = not specified: 0.7 %
Cronbachs Alpha = 0.42
Table 5: Attitudes of respondents towards advertising in general

The respondents’ critical attitude towards advertising in general is in line with the
findings of other studies (Barnes 1982; Witkowski & Kellner 1998), with only the item “Ad-
vertising creates new jobs” displaying a strongly positive attitude towards advertising. The
feedback regarding attitudes towards virtual advertising, as shown in Table 6, was better. A
clear majority agrees that by means of virtual advertising, advertising space can be better
marketed. Nearly three quarters of all respondents disapprove of a prohibition of this form of
advertising. Equally, a majority is of the opinion that virtual advertising does not have an irri-
tating effect. This finding, however, should not be generalized, as the kind of virtual advertis-
ing certainly plays a significant role here. As we postulated that attitudes towards advertising
in general might influence attitudes towards virtual advertising, we also verified the relation-
ship of the participants’ attitudes towards advertising in general and towards virtual advertis-
ing by means of correlation analysis. This correlation is highly significant (p=0.000) and, as it
had to be assumed, positive (r=0.40). Therefore, the results support H3.
Finally, we investigated whether attitudes towards advertising in general and towards
virtual advertising in particular affect the participants’ recall level, measured by the number of
correctly recalled brands. We could not find a significant correlation between these variables;
hence, in our sample, a positive (or negative) attitude towards advertising did not influence
advertising recall (this is supported by the findings of Gupta & Gould 1997 and Zajonc 1968).
Further analysis showed that there is no significant difference in gender and sports involve-
ment with regard to the recall level. H4a and H4b are therefore rejected.

12
 I rather agree I rather disagree
Item
(1+2) (3+4+5)
Virtual advertising is an in-
teresting, new form of adver- 37.3 % 60.6 %
tisinga
Virtual advertising irritates
42.3 % 55.6 %
television viewersa
By virtual advertising play-
ing areas can be better mar- 62.7 % 35.2 %
keteda
Virtual advertising should be
23.3 % 73.9 %
prohibitedb
a = not specified: 2.1 %
b = not specified: 2.8 %
Cronbachs Alpha = 0.69
Table 6: Attitudes of respondents towards virtual advertising

DISCUSSION
Managerial implications
The results of our study are consistent with previous studies, but they allow more dif-
ferentiated and extensive statements. Basically, virtual advertising is of importance for the
viewer’s attention. In our study, virtual advertising was recognized and associated correctly
by a vast majority of respondents.
An essential result of this study is the fact that the duration of exposure does not play a
strong role, whereas the frequency of exposure has a significant influence on the effectiveness
of advertising. As already mentioned, this is consistent with the results from other studies and,
for advertising decisions, this suggests implementing virtual advertisements in frequent altera-
tion in order to achieve stronger attentiveness effects. However, consideration must be taken
of legal limitations, which sometimes prohibit the use of additional advertising space for vir-
tual advertising on frequently visible sites (FIFA 1999). Despite a positive tendency in the
assessment of virtual advertising, a too obtrusive implementation of this new form of advertis-
ing is perceived as rather disturbing. Our investigation indicates that more than 40% of the
participants are irritated by virtual advertising. A main reason for this may be the fact that this
communications tool is hardly known to potential customers as yet. Above all, virtual adver-
tising should not divert from the sports event, in order not to jeopardize the acceptance by
television viewers. This applies both to virtual advertising on the playing field and to virtual
3D animations during the game coverage. Similar to product placement, a too obtrusive use of
virtual advertising will cause reactance and may lead to viewers switching to other TV sta-
tions like pay-TV with less or no advertising (Gupta & Gould 1997; Russel 2002). For this
13
reason, a cautious implementation is recommendable, which does not differ too much from
the familiar forms of TV advertising, at least at the initial stage of the use of virtual advertis-
ing in sports broadcasts. At a later stage, when virtual advertising is implemented on a larger
scale and viewers have become accustomed to this new form, one may resort to more con-
spicuous forms of virtual advertising. However, care should always be taken not to impair the
credibility of television as a medium. This is the case when viewers feel that contents are arbi-
trarily manipulated at the TV station.
As clearly shown in other studies (Babin & Sheri 1996; Russell 2002; Sander 2004),
prior brand awareness also tends to have a positive effect on brand recall. As mentioned, the
non-significance of this variable in the present study is probably due to the small variance of
this variable.
The investigation whether attitudes towards advertising in general and towards virtual
advertising have an impact on the participants´ recall showed no significant effect. This
means that some consumers with a tendency to negative attitudes towards advertising can
nevertheless have positive reactions towards advertising, e.g. high recall rates. From a mana-
gerial perspective advertising budgets which hit these consumers are not wasted per se.

Limitations and future research

Similar to the other studies mentioned above, our survey was a laboratory study,
where a certain distortion occurs due to the inherent monitoring effect (Lynch 1982; Winer
1999). As the aim of our study was camouflaged, however, we can assume that the internal
validity was guaranteed (Schram 2005). Furthermore, valid conclusions can be drawn from
the comparison between the effectiveness of conventional and virtual advertising, as both
forms of advertising were affected in equal measure by the laboratory situation.
Our study was conceived as an exploratory analysis. Further studies should broaden
the sample to include demographics to represent the audience of sports broadcasts. Also, in
our study we could only examine the effects of virtual off-goal billboard advertising on con-
sumer response. Further research should evaluate the effectiveness of different kinds of vir-
tual advertising (3D animation, animated virtual advertising etc.) as well as of different loca-
tions, as already suggested by the study of Cianfrone et al. (2006).
We could not measure the impact of an integrated communication strategy on the ef-
fects of virtual advertising because other communications instruments were missing in our
video clip. Further studies should evaluate the effectiveness of virtual advertising when com-

14
bined with other forms of advertising (e.g. TV spots or programme sponsoring) to assess the
effects of integrated communication and cross-media advertising.
Virtual advertising may also be implemented outside sports events, e.g. as virtual
placements in motion pictures (d’ Astous & Séguin 1999). Future research has to show
whether the advertising effects of virtual placements are similar to the effects of conventional
product placement especially with respect to brand recall and brand image.

References
Babin, L. & Sheri, C. (1996) Viewers’ Recognition of Brands Placed within a Film,
International Journal of Advertising, 15 (2), 140 - 151.
Barnes, M. (1982) Public Attitudes to Advertising, Journal of Advertising, 1 (2), 119 –
128.
Bennett, R. (1999) Sports Sponsorship, Spectator Recall and False Consensus, Euro-
pean Journal of Marketing, 33 (3/4), 291 – 313.
Bennett, G., Ferreira, M., Tsuji, Y., Siders, R. & Cianfrone, B. (2006) Analysing the
Effects of Advertising Type and Antecedents on Attitude Towards Advertising in Sport –
Comparison of Television Commercials and Virtual Advertising in a Sports Broadcast Set-
ting, International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 8 (1), 62 – 81.
Brackett, L. K. & Carr, B. N. Jr. (2001) Cyberspace Advertising vs. Other Media:
Consumer vs. Mature Student Attitudes, Journal of Advertising Research, 41 (5), 23 – 32.
Brand, J. E. & Greenburg, B. S. (1994) Commercials in the Classroom: The Impact of
Channel One Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research, 34 (1), 18 – 27.
Brunel, F. F. & Nelson, M. R. (2003) Message Order Effects and Gender Differences
in Advertising Persuasion, Journal of Advertising Research, 43 (3), 330 – 341.
Cianfrone, B., Bennett, G., Siders, R. & Tsuji, Y. (2006) Virtual Advertising and
Brand Awareness, International Journal of Sport Management and Marketing, 1 (4), 289 –
310.
Churchill, G. A. (1979) A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing
Constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, 16 (February), 64 – 73.
Converse, J. M. & Presser, S. (1986) Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized
Questionnaire, Newbury Park, CA.
d´Astous, A. & Séguin, N. (1999) Consumer Reactions to Product Placement Strate-
gies in Television Sponsorship, European Journal of Marketing, 33 (9/10), 896 – 910.

15
 Doyle, A. (2000) Use of “Virtual” TV Ads Expected to Grow Rapidly, under:
www.infocomm.org/Newsnetwork/index.cfm?objectID=B9CCD11B-CB08-11D4-
A09800D0B7913DE7&method=display&iPart=6 (accessed November 11, 2006).
Drees, N. (1991) Das Sponsoring-Barometer – Ergebnisse einer Unternehmensbefra-
gung, Werbeforschung & Praxis, 36 (1), 9-12.
Eckstein, L. (1999) Technische Möglichkeiten der digitalen Bildbearbeitung, Hessi-
sche Landesanstalt für den privaten Rundfunk, ed., Digital oder Original? Virtuelle Werbung
bei Sportübertragungen im Fernsehen, München 1999, S. 43-50.
Farrelly, F. J., Quester, P. G. & Burton, R. (1997) Integrating Sports Sponsorship into
the Corporate Marketing Function: an International Comparative Study, International Market-
ing Review, 14 (3), 170 – 182.
FIFA (1999) Regulations for the Use of Virtual Advertising, Zurich.
Fösken, S. (2005) Splitscreen & Co: Die Ergebnisse überraschen nicht, absatzwirt-
schaft, 48 (6), 98 – 100.
FORSA (1998) TV Today – Das Fernsehbarometer: Die Trends im deutschen Fernse-
hen. Schwerpunkt: Werbung im Fernsehen. Studie im Auftrag von TV Today, 1998.
Gierl, H. & Kirchner, A. (1999) Emotionale Bindung und Imagetransfer durch Sport-
sponsoring, transfer – Werbeforschung und Praxis, 44 (3), 32 – 35.
Grohs, R., Wagner, U. & Vsetecka, S. (2004) Assessing the Effectiveness of Sport
Sponsorships – An Empirical Examination, Schmalenbach Business Review, 56 (4), 119 –
138.
Gupta, P. B. & Gould, S. J. (1997) Consumers Perceptions of the Ethics and Accept-
ability of Product Placements in Movies: Product Category and Individual Differences, Jour-
nal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 19 (1), 38 – 50.
Hackforth, J. (1989) Zwischen Bandenwerbung und Bandenwirkung – Erste Ergeb-
nisse einer Studie zur EURO 88, in Sport- und Kultursponsoring, Hermanns, A., ed.,
München, 100 – 111.
Harshaw, C. E. & Turner, E. T. (1999) Assessing the Recognition of Perimeter Adver-
tising Signage by Television Viewers of NASCAR Winston Cup Events, Sports Marketing
Quarterly, 8 (4), 35 – 40.
James, W. L. & Kover, A. J. (1992) Observations: Do Overall Attitudes Toward Ad-
vertising Affect Involvement With Specific Advertisements?, Journal of Advertising Re-
search, 32 (5), 78 – 83.

16
 Longman, K. A. (1997) If Not Effective Frequency, Then What?, Journal of Advertis-
ing Research, 37 (4), 44 – 50.
Lutz, R. J., McKenzie, S. B. & Belch, G. E. (1983) Attitude Toward The Ad as a Me-
diator of Advertising Effectiveness: Determinants and Consequences, Advances in Consumer
Research, 10 (1), 532 – 539.
Lynch, J. G. Jr. (1982) On the External Validity of Experiments in Consumer Re-
search, Journal of Consumer Research 9 (December), 225 – 239.
Meenaghan, T. (2001) Understanding Sport Sponsorship Effects, Psychology & Mar-
keting, 18 (2), 95 – 122.
Meenaghan, T. & Shipley, D. (1999) Media Effect in Commercial Sponsorship, Euro-
pean Journal of Marketing, 33 (3/4), 328 – 347.
Mehta, A. (2000) Advertising Attitudes and Advertising Effectiveness, Journal of Ad-
vertising Research, 40 (3), 67 – 72.
Moore, J. N., Pickett, G. M. & Grove, S. J. (1999) The Impact of a Video Screen and
Rotational-Signage Systems on Satisfaction and Advertising Recognition, Journal of Services
Marketing, 13 (6), 453 – 468.
Nebenzahl, I. & Hornik, J. (1985) An Experimental Study of the Effectiveness of
Commercial Billboards in Televised Sports Arenas, International Journal of Advertising, 4
(1), 27 – 36.
Olivier, A. J. & Kraak, E. M. (1997) Sponsorship Effectiveness. What Is Driving Con-
sumer Response?, Proceedings of the 210th ESOMAR Seminar, New Ways For Optimising
Integrated Communications, Session III: Sponsorship, Paris, April 16-18.
Olson, E. L. & Thjømøe , H. M. (2009) Sponsorship Effect Metric: Assessing the Fi-
nancial Value of Sponsoring by Comparisons to Television Advertising, Journal of the Acad-
emy of Marketing Science, (2009) 37, 504 – 515.
Petrovici, D. & Marinov, M. (2007) Determinants and Antecedents of General Atti-
tudes Towards Advertising. A Study of Two EU Accession Countries, European Journal of
Marketing, 41 (3/4), 307 – 326.
Pham, M.T. & Johar, G. V. (2001) Market Prominence Biases in Sponsor Identifica-
tion: Processes and Consequentiality, Psychology and Marketing, 18 (2), 123 – 143.
Pieters, R. G. & Bijmolt, T. H. (1997) Consumer Memory for Television Advertising:
A Field Study of Duration, Serial Position, and Competition Effects, Journal of Consumer
Research, 23 (4), 362 – 372.

17
 Psyma (1999), Virtuelle Bandenwerbung – Day After Recall Test, Benfica Lissabon
vs. Bayern München 10/08/1999, Studiennummer: 1068994, Nürnberg.
Pyun, D. Y., Han, J. & Ha, J. H. (2004) Attitudes and Effectiveness toward/of Virtual
Advertising on Major League Baseball, Paper presented at the Annual Conference for the
Sport Marketing Association, November, Memphis, TN.
Pyun, D. Y. & Kim, J. (2004) An Examination of Virtual Advertising Exposure on
Major League Baseball: Comparing to In-Stadium Advertising Exposure by a Content Analy-
sis, Journal of Korean Sport Research, 15 (1), 683 – 694.
Quester, P. G., Farrelly, F. J. & Burton, R. (1998) Sports Sponsorship Management: an
International Comparative Study, Journal of Marketing Communications, 4, 115 – 128.
Rifon, N., Choi, S., Trimble, C. & Li, H. (2004): Congruence Effects in Sponsorship:
The Mediating Role of Sponsor Credibility and Consumer Attributions of Sponsor Motive,
Journal of Advertising, 33 (1), 29 – 43.
Russell, C. A. (2002) Investigating the Effectiveness of Product Placements in Televi-
sion Shows: The Role of Modality and Plot Connection Congruence on Brand Memory and
Attitude, Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (12), 306 – 318.
Sander, M. (2004) Wirkungen von Drehbanden als innovative Form der Bandenwer-
bung, Marketing ZFP, 26 (3), 199 – 213.
Sandler, D. M. & Shani, D. (1989) Olympic Sponsorship vs. “Ambush” Marketing:
Who Gets The Gold?, Journal of Advertising Research, 29 (4), 9 – 14.
Sasse, N. & Ludwig, S. (2002) Virtuelle Werbung im Sport – Akzeptanz einer neuen
Werbeform, in Sport und neue Märkte: Innovation – Expansion – Investition, Trosien, G. &
Dinkel, M., eds., Butzbach-Griedel, 191 – 200.
Sawyer, A. (1981) Repetition, Cognitive Responses and Persuasion, in Cognitive Re-
sponses in Persuasion, Ostrom, T., Petty, R. E. & Brock, T. C. , eds., Hillsdale, New Jersey,
263 – 282.
Schram, A. (2005) Artificially: The Tension between Internal and External Validity in
Economic Experiments, Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2), 225 – 237.
Taub, H. A. & Abrams, C. (1971) Effects of Target Value and Exposure Duration on
Recall in a Visual Search Task, Journal of Applied Psychology, 55 (4), 393 – 398.
Tellis, G. (1997) Effective Frequency: One Exposure or Three Factors?, Journal of
Advertising Research, 37 (4), 75 – 80.
Turley, L. W. & Shannon, J. R. (2000) The Impact and Effectiveness of Advertise-
ments in a Sports Arena, Journal of Services Marketing, 14 (4), 323 – 336.

18
 Virtualvas (2007) New Step in Virtual Advertising, under:
www.virtualvas.com/hmain.html (accessed December 23, 2007).
Wakefield, K. L., Becker-Olsen, K. & Cornwell, T. B. (2007) I Spy a Sponsor. The
Effects of Sponsorship Level, Prominence, Relatedness, and Cueing on Recall Accuracy,
Journal of Advertising 36 (4), 61 – 74.
Walliser, B. (2003) An International Review of Sponsorship Research: Extension and
Update, International Journal of Advertising, 22, 5 – 40.
Walliser, B. (1997) What Sponsorship Can Learn From Outdoor Advertising, Proceed-
ings of the 210th ESOMAR Seminar, New Ways For Optimising Integrated Communications,
Session III: Sponsorship, Paris, April 16-18.
Wang, C., Zhang, P., Choi, R. & D´Eredita, M. (2002) Understanding Consumers Atti-
tude Toward Advertising, Eighth Americas Conference on Information Systems 2002, 1143 –
1148.
Wells, W. (2000) Recognition, Recall, and Rating Scales, Journal of Advertising Re-
search, 40 (6), 14 – 21.
Winer, R. S. (1999) Experimentation in the 21st Century: The Importance of External
Validity, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 27 (Summer), 349 – 358.
Witkowski, T. H. & Kellner, J. (1998) Convergent, Contrasting, and Country-Specific
Attitudes toward Television Advertising in Germany and the United States, Journal of Busi-
ness Research, 42 (2), 167 – 174.
Zajonc, R. B. (1968) Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology Monograph, 9 (2), 1 – 28.

19